Civ 5 announced!
- Thread starter Shylock
- Start date
- Status
flamescreen
Ancient Mariner
I love 2d myself and still play games that use that style.
That said, we are talking about 3d made into 2d. I think 2d still has lots of options for many games, by given the fact they already used 3d for CIV I doubt they'll go back to 2d.
Now I have played CIV, no my machine doesn't worth 1000's and yes I am a gamer, I don't belong in the top though. No the average gamer will NOT spend 100's buying new equipment cause just for a game, they can't afford it, as they're too young.
I could live with 3d, but they have to be smaller, they are too big currently and don't look natural at all, they have to be proportional to the landscape(Civ3 suffers from that too, but 3d is supposedly bringing realism as I read users write here) and cities(which have to go smaller themselves so you can see the unit afterwards, EDIT: or maybe make room for the unit so it stands somewhere next to the city so you can see it easier). Plus the 3d in CIV are ugly, they better improve the 3d quality too.
Having said that, a 2d/3d option wouldn't be bad at all, but it may be too time consuming and expensive for them to do. Above all though, it MUST have great gameplay, if I only want eye candy I can look at digital paintings or something.
That said, we are talking about 3d made into 2d. I think 2d still has lots of options for many games, by given the fact they already used 3d for CIV I doubt they'll go back to 2d.
Now I have played CIV, no my machine doesn't worth 1000's and yes I am a gamer, I don't belong in the top though. No the average gamer will NOT spend 100's buying new equipment cause just for a game, they can't afford it, as they're too young.
I could live with 3d, but they have to be smaller, they are too big currently and don't look natural at all, they have to be proportional to the landscape(Civ3 suffers from that too, but 3d is supposedly bringing realism as I read users write here) and cities(which have to go smaller themselves so you can see the unit afterwards, EDIT: or maybe make room for the unit so it stands somewhere next to the city so you can see it easier). Plus the 3d in CIV are ugly, they better improve the 3d quality too.
Having said that, a 2d/3d option wouldn't be bad at all, but it may be too time consuming and expensive for them to do. Above all though, it MUST have great gameplay, if I only want eye candy I can look at digital paintings or something.
Love
Deity
Yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ooh, that reminds me of something I'd like to see, whether in a mod or the next Civ or whatever
Each Civ has three leaders. I think three may be stretching it for a lot of them, and four won't work at all for many. So let's say three. And you get to choose your leader at the start just like now. But, any time you switch civics, or any time you bump to the next age, you have a chance of flipping leaders, and thus traits.
You'd have to impose limits on it to keep Spiritual-heavy civs from constantly rolling the dice to get traits they like... but it adds some interesting decision-making, I think, to the whole leadership abstraction, allowing civs to change personalities.
(It would be amusing, though maybe not a good idea, to have 4 leaders/civ, one of which is terrible. "Quick, everybody get Rome! They've got Caligula!" But then, doesn't Montezuma already qualify as a "terrible leader"?)
thenooblet22
King
Um, if you didn't hear, Sid Mier recently denounced Civilization V as the next project coming out. Furthermore, if you have any ideas, there is a Ideas & Suggestions subforum.
Bongo-Bongo
The Master
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2005
- Messages
- 621
Providing it doesn't get included in any future expansions, I'd like to see Civil War reintroduced.
The way I would implement this would be as follows:
Firstly, each Civ would need to have at least two different leaders to make the split realistic.
Now the split could come about through several different reasons. One could be for a large amount of unhappiness, unhealthiness or a poor economy. Another reason could be religous. For example, if the state religion is a minority religion, and a civic such as theocracy is being used, then this could cause unrest. As a result, the unhappy cities could revolt against you, finding a new leader in the Civs alternate leader.
At this point, you would obviously be at war with the other faction. Now there should be three ways to resolve the conflict. Firstly, war. You could either completley conquer the break away faction, or beat them into submission. An alternative would be diplomacy. Be it giving them what they want, such as promising to build building to suit there needs, convert to their religiion, adopt new civics, or become more/less war like. The final alternative would be through unhappiness in the revolting faction. This could be through either mismanagement by their new leader, or, with an improved spy system, by damaging their existing economy to create unhappiness.
If you fail to reunite your nation, there should be a chance that they could seperate permanently and become two seperate civilizations.
The way I would implement this would be as follows:
Firstly, each Civ would need to have at least two different leaders to make the split realistic.
Now the split could come about through several different reasons. One could be for a large amount of unhappiness, unhealthiness or a poor economy. Another reason could be religous. For example, if the state religion is a minority religion, and a civic such as theocracy is being used, then this could cause unrest. As a result, the unhappy cities could revolt against you, finding a new leader in the Civs alternate leader.
At this point, you would obviously be at war with the other faction. Now there should be three ways to resolve the conflict. Firstly, war. You could either completley conquer the break away faction, or beat them into submission. An alternative would be diplomacy. Be it giving them what they want, such as promising to build building to suit there needs, convert to their religiion, adopt new civics, or become more/less war like. The final alternative would be through unhappiness in the revolting faction. This could be through either mismanagement by their new leader, or, with an improved spy system, by damaging their existing economy to create unhappiness.
If you fail to reunite your nation, there should be a chance that they could seperate permanently and become two seperate civilizations.
gamedude107
Permanoob(i play settler)
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 96
i hate 2d its rubbish
Love
Deity
Kolath
Eternal Lurker
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2001
- Messages
- 169
Haha, beat me to it.
It is presicely because it is a strategic game that 2d is much better.
1) you do not actually fight the battles, it is odds. You just push the army.
2) 3d makes the game soooooooooooooooo sloooooooooooooow comparing to a 2d version. Dont you hate waiting and waiting and zzzzzz..... for other civs to finish? or the super slow motion when you have 200 armies all over the world?
I dont say civ should be 2D. I just say that some of us would like to have the option to play it with very low graphic requirements and in 2D. oh!! and that i love this game!! in spite of 3d!!!
Ploeperpengel
academic precarity
It's not the graphics that make the game slow but the AI considering where to move the units on the the map -> the more units and the larger the map the slower the game is(civ3 has the same problem). Compared to other strategygames civgfx still don't need much systemressources.
Jamesds
Great Scientist
Civ4: Beyond the Sword seems to be the most abundant expansion pack in Civ history....10 new civs...5 wonders...several new features...it does sound really good. Unfortunately for some though, it isn't 2D 
ok, i agree with you. Since my screen is not moving, it is only the AI consuming resources. I repeat: I agree.
But then, when it is my turn, moving from right to left or to any other place in the map is a pain in the patience. At that moment, the AI is calculating zero, nada!
Then it comes the time when you have to open the citzzzzzzz, sorry, did I sleep on my writing?
Then you move in the city console from one city to another, again... it is seconds, many, 5? 10?
Then you select something, a worker... seconds for the screen to react, and then you disband it... seconds and then it takes you out of the city -but you still wanted to disband other 4 workers!!! so go back in the citzzzzzz, *sorry*, select your worker (wait), disband it (wait)... wait wait!!! Im out of the city again!!!
ok, im not Mr. programing expert (sorry fellow developers, im just a guy).
Dont take me wrong, I love the game. Maybe I suggest 2D because Im ignorant, but make no mistake, faster would be better.
All those player actions take fractions of a second for me at most, and I have a 3 year old PC.. have 2GB of ram thou.
How much RAM do you have? such delays would be typical if you have little RAM, and your PC have to swap a lot (kinda like on my work laptop that only have 512MB, and 128MB of those are used by the graphics card)
there you got me. I have a Pentium 4 with 512MB Ram. But that is exactly what I mean... there should be a 2D option for low profile Hardware.
But when I bought that computer, it was the best in the market (ehemmm... they always are) and civ 3 was what I used to play. sort of same story... slow.
What I mean is that 5 years ago (or 6), I had the latest hardware and I used to think.... why dont they enable a 2D option?
and I repeat: I love the game! I just would like it to be slow, but not so slow and yes, I will buy a desktop soon, so dont try to fix the issue with better hardware, that is not the way to go, but implementing better code.
doronron
King
Like I pointed out in the suggestions forum, you're basically asking for them to program the entire game from scratch. What's the speed of your CPU? What is the model of your graphics card, and how much RAM does it have?
Those are two other possible bottlenecks.
Civ3 was 2D. It was never 3D. They were all 2D sprites.
Those are two other possible bottlenecks.
Civ3 was 2D. It was never 3D. They were all 2D sprites.
So this is the end of the 2D revolution =(
I have a pentium 4, 1.2G(?), ATI card, 512Ram...
ok, I will buy a new desktop -this time with at least 2Gb in Ram, a nice video-game card. My notebook is old nowadays anyway.
troyDoogle7
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2005
- Messages
- 247
My computer is about 23 years old,. I play large world and 8 civs and game is very snappy for me. I have 1 gb ram and 256 graphics card.. The average new computer...even a cheap laptop... will handle the game perfectly.... No need for the 2d option... If you want 2d go for civ3
- Status
